Andreas Hartmann wrote:
Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
what i do care about is stopping people from ever again introducing
multi-dimensional, semantically overloaded metadata tables (!) with
built-in extensibility (!!) represented as single strings (!!!)
without so much as a passing regard for documenting this whole pile of
shit anywhere, and then having to use (shudder!) regexes to clean up
the mess.
workflowVersion in its current state is an abomination unto $deity and
must die.
fast.
violently.
Actually I don't really understand this concern. The workflowVersion
meta data are accessed only by the workflow engine, they are strictly
private and I see no need for applying any regular expressions on
them. If you need workflow information, ask the workflow engine ...
take the case of a "last modified on...by..." footer. that's probably
the most basic cms feature than i could think of. it is currently not
possible with lenya.
this information *must* absolutely be available on a cocoon level,
either as from an input module or a generator or both. talking about
writing custom java code for this every time i need it is just ridiculous.
my starting point to achieve this goal was the LenyaMetaDataGenerator,
which was written by a seasoned contributor to lenya, so i figured that
this was the most obvious and consistent way to get at the data i need.
of course i could gather the data from all over the place, but that
would make things even more inconsistent. as it is now, every document
has its own metadata. that's nice and should remain as it is. all i'm
asking for is that this metadata is structured, documented and handled
in a sane way.
if, as you say, the workflowVersion data is private and encapsulated,
that's even less of an excuse to have all that substring() mayhem in the
getter functions (see
java/org/apache/lenya/cms/workflow/DocumentWorkflowable.java#getVersions).
basically all i want the metadata generator to do is spit out the
contents of the metadata xml file. of course that file is
implementation-dependant, so i can't just read it, but still the data
should be all in one place internally.
There's no point in specifying the workflow meta data, because they
might change, and every workflow engine might use its own meta data
format.
there is no point in specifying things because they might change? by
that reasoning, the entire w3.org website is obsolete by definition.
--
"Open source takes the bullshit out of software."
- Charles Ferguson on TechnologyReview.com
--
Jörn Nettingsmeier, EDV-Administrator
Institut für Politikwissenschaft
Universität Duisburg-Essen, Standort Duisburg
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Telefon: 0203/379-2736
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
